Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

My Youtube earnings

brickexperimentchannel.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 422 posts

Re: My Youtube earnings

#251

Post by tsimionescu »

a4a4a4a4 wrote: post #236
amake wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He’s a liberal Is he?

"Liberal" in the US used to mean (and still does outside the US) someone with a "live and let live" mentality, where things/actions are generally allowed unless there is a very good reason for restricting them. "Classically liberal" is a better match for the term in modern US English. So things like decriminalizing drugs, allowing gay marriage, being pro-gun/self-defense as a human right, privacy as a human right, et…

People usually call Rogan liberal because he occasionally showed(s?) some sympathy for the US left - like him inviting Bernie Sanders on during his primary campaign. I think this is far more likely than applying a non-US definition of liberalism to him - especially since many right-wingers the GGP is referring to are also liberal based on this other definition.

Re: My Youtube earnings

#252

Post by alkonaut »

> impressions click-through rate: 5.9%

What does this mean? That 5.9% of users who were shown an ad, clicked the ad (and thus left the video to pursue catfood?)

Re: My Youtube earnings

#253

Post by amelius »

adalacelove wrote: post #229
warent wrote: post #5

The transparency of this is really amazing; big respect. It's interesting to think that this information was quietly posted to their low-traffic blog with little notice, meanwhile the information contained is actually extremely valuable (and itself would have probably made a highly valuable youtube video itself with 10s of millions of views). I wonder how much other information exists on the web that is extremely val…

> I wonder how much other information exists on the web that is extremely valuable yet unnoticed Basically every scientific progress which gets published on peer reviewed journals (a lot of them open). Some books also are online.

They are not exactly what one would call unnoticed.

Re: My Youtube earnings

#254

Post by smolder »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #212
_tom_ wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> still 100% depends on youtube’s algorithm. That's the scary part. He spends years building a channel and it can be wiped out in a day. He needs to diversify. Sponsorships/ads won't help, they'd die with the channel. I'm not in this space, but maybe patreon? Does onlyfans do non-porn? Vimeo? How does one minimize risk to this $150k/year revenue stream?

Patreon works, but only as a monetization platform; while it's a channel that can offer early access to e.g. new videos, in practice the vast majority of views will still be on youtube and unless it's something critical, patrons will wait until it's on youtube anyway (citation needed). Onlyfans doesn't do porn, nu-uh, where did you even get that idea? It doesn't market specifically to adult content, is what I mean, l…

> Some big players have expanded to clothing brands or, weirdly enough, doing wrestling / boxing matches.

Don't leave out cryptocurrency scams.

Re: My Youtube earnings

#255

Post by amelius »

mdmglr wrote: post #19

The first video I watched on this channel was the Lego submarine. Quite a cool channel. The format of minimal talking and to-the-point and normal thumbnails is refreshing. Cool that one can make this much on their hobbies.

The submarine video looks cool but I think the video speed has been manipulated.

Re: My Youtube earnings

#256

Post by tsimionescu »

stephen_g wrote: post #223
bagels wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your channel covers certain taboo topics it can be "demonetized" which means no revenue from Google. Those channels often have other sponsors.

They do demonetise videos, yes, but I believe they still put ads on them (just they take the money, not the creator).

I believe they don't put ads on most demonetised videos, since they are typically demonetised because (YT's algorithms think that) advertisers don't want their ads associated with the content.

Re: My Youtube earnings

#257

Post by nibbleshifter »

ilkke wrote: post #241
nibbleshifter wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All content is advertised on by YT, they just don't start sharing revenue with you until you have 1k subs.

Exactly. My bet is it's simple greed, and that it shuts enough people (and revenue) out to make Google a pretty penny. Likely it was a decision based on analytics that Google, and no one else, has. Imagine we are talking a cable TV platform instead, and your analytics show that most people flip through channels most of the time, as opposed to actually watching something specific. You make a rule to only share revenue…

> Making people feel they need to earn the right that their earnings be shared with them is just icing on the cake.

That's not even the half of it. Unless your channel is big enough to be considered a "partner", you are basically fucked when it comes to content strikes, DMCA, AI/contractor driven "community standards" issues, random demonetization, etc. There's no real "support".

The demonetizing thing is particularly funny, I know of channels where their videos get demonetized for content guidelines violations, but viewers still see advertisements. Happens a lot with firearms related content.

Re: My Youtube earnings

#258

Post by ricardo81 »

Adsense was great when it came out (as someone who used it). Passive income, build something and make money in the hours in between when you're not working on it.

I wonder how much more money their (or any) channel would make and how long it would take to taper off?

I suppose the main reason would be algo changes on recommendations, then age after a number of years, and possibly other channels potentially 'recycling' the content. Perhaps the popularity of lego and YT itself also.

Re: My Youtube earnings

#259

Post by richrichardsson »

a4a4a4a4 wrote: post #249
Uehreka wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Joe Rogan is an American commenting almost exclusively in the American political context. Referring to him as a liberal in this context is misleading, as the term here is almost exclusively understood to mean “center-left relative to American politics” and is almost never used in the economic or philosophical sense in mainstream political commentary.

I'm aware of who he is, and the context of "liberal" when referring to him and his views. I'm offering an explanation as to why someone might describe him as "liberal", because if anyone outside the US listened to his viewpoints they would describe him as "liberal". I'd be willing to bet that the original commenter is not American, and that's why they chose "liberal", not to be misleading, but because literally the e…

> because literally the entire rest of the world uses the word differently

This assumed cultural hegemony by some US citizens is frustrating as hell; they are incredibly quick to assume (or demand even) the rest of the world knows their cultural references/idioms/etc., yet make zero effort to discover what the rest of the world is doing. Unfortunately they are also loud and so it's easy to come to the false conclusion all US citizens are like that.

Re: My Youtube earnings

#260

Post by lynx23 »

a4a4a4a4 wrote: post #236
amake wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He’s a liberal Is he?

"Liberal" in the US used to mean (and still does outside the US) someone with a "live and let live" mentality, where things/actions are generally allowed unless there is a very good reason for restricting them. "Classically liberal" is a better match for the term in modern US English. So things like decriminalizing drugs, allowing gay marriage, being pro-gun/self-defense as a human right, privacy as a human right, et…

> only restricting that freedom where absolutely necessary

I used to believe this as well. I was thaught a lesson... In fact, now I understand that liberals, when given the power, will corrupt into totalitarism in a few months.

Post reply on HN